Saleena Karim's book Secular Jinnah & Pakistan
has appeared at the right time when Pakistan is under turmoil and
there is an Arab uprising also in most of the Arab Muslim countries
demanding real democracy against nefarious dictatorship and specifically
insisting that democracy should work for the welfare of the common
people and not for one percent of the people against 99 persent
of the people. This is also the demand of the American common people
as manifested by the demonstrators sitting in Time Square in New
York City of USA. All Muslims - majority counries are in terrible
confusion of thought regarding the meaning of Islam, democracy,
secularism and the relationship bewteen reason and Revelation.

In this book, she has discussed two main points: (1)
why a separate State of Pakistan was demanded in the Indian subcontinent
and (2) the second is the attempt to clarify the ideology of Mohammad
Ali Jinnah and Dr. Mohammad Iqbal which again was or should be the
ideology of the state of Pakistan.

Both these questions are inter-related, but I do not
discuss here the first question as to why a separate State of Pakistan
was thought to be necessary because the separate State of Pakistan
has already come into existence since long. So, the question is
what was the ideology on which the State of Pakistan was expected
by Jinnah and Iqbal to function. Saleena karim has done full justice
in terms of deep research & hardwork in answering both the questions.
But however, I restrict myself to the discussion of the second one,
namely the concept of the ideology of the state in which Muslims
are in majority. This is because what should be true for Pakistan,
may be or should be true for other Muslim- majority countries also.

Review

In the Preface of her book, Saleena has formulated
the second question very correctly with the following words:

"Focusing as we are on Jinnah's
political career, this book addresses the issue of whether he had
a secular or a religious vision for Pakistan, or perhaps something
else. Historians & other commentators outside of Pakistan have
traditionally placed Jinnah in the secular category. Pakistani commentators
meanwhile generally place him in one of the three polictical categories:

"The reason is obvious: Pakistan as a country
has yet to find its place in the world, and Jinnah was its founder.
Logically, we assume that if we can reach a consensus on Jinnah's
thought, then we can also reslove the long standing question of
what kind of state Pakistan was meant to be, and thus how it should
develop today. Pakistanis are tired of self-serving politicians,
landlordism, nepotism, the rise of religious fundamentalism, corruption,
economic instability & the same predictable cycle between incompetent
bureaucratic [regimes] and military regimes. Hence, for Pakistanis
more than any one else, the debate over Jinnah is a highly emotive
subject, and at its heart is a battle of ideas. Pakistanis are really
trying to work out something much bigger than just Jinnah's place
in history, They are trying to find their own historical identity
as well."

Nobody would place Jinnah in the religionist category
which implies theocracy and it also leads to sectarianism. Jinnah
was a liberal Muslim and hence he was a secularist also, but he
was not a secularist of a materialist type and his secularism and
liberalism and pluralism emanated from his spiritual values of Freedom,
Equality, Justice, Fairplay
and Brotherhood which are also the universal principles of Islam.
He believed in one Supreme God and one mankind without any distinction
of high and low and without any discrimination among human beings
on the basis of religion, caste, creed, race or colour. All are
equal citzens in the world-polity under the stewardship and supervision
of one God.

it should be noted that "secularism" has
got two broad meanings - one is secularist, i.e. materialist, dealing
with the profane world only which is considered to be without spiritual
basis or without any spirtual element. The other meaning of secularism
is neutralism of the State towards all religion and therefore it
will not adopt any particular religion as state religion. But, it
does not mean that the state will not adopt the humanist values
of freedom Equality and Justice. On the contrary, a Muslim majority
state particularly guided by Jinnah and Iqbal must adopt these humanist
values, because in Islam as envisaged in the Quran requires that
State and Society must try to imbibe these values (of Freedom, Equality,
Justice, Secularism and Brotherhood) not only in thought but lso
in social practice. But, it has not been done so, which is a real
tragedy.

The question is why it happened other than what was
expected. Let us first mention here some excerpts from M A Jinnah's
presidential speech delivered on 11 August 1947 in the Consituent
Assembly of Pakistan. He announced:

"You may belong to any religion or caste or
creed - that has nothing to do withe business of the state (Hear,hear)
- We are starting in the days when there is no discrimination, no
distinction between one community and another, no discrimination
between one caste or creed or another. We are starting with this
fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens
of one state (Loud Applause). Now, I think you should keep that
in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in [the] the
course of time, Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would
be cease to be Muslims, not in the religion sense, because that
is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense
as citizens of the state."

Thus, it seems that Mr. Jinnah is a perfect secularist,
but not the materialist type of a secularist, i.e. in the first
sense of the term, but in the second sense of the term, i.e. the
State may not formally adopt any particular religion as the state
religion, but at the same time, adopting all the values of Islam
namely Freedom, Equality, Justice and solidiarity. Here the source
of inspiration for these values is important which is Islam, but
it may not be mentioned in the constitution. So, out of the three
political catefgories in one of which Mr. Jinnah can be placed,
the first two i.e. (1) the secularist (materialist ) and (2) the
(religionist orthodox Muslims) are ruled out and even the 3rd category
of the modernist (liberal Muslims ) can be further sub-divided into
two categories, according to Saleena karim . She writes about this
important point as follows in her preface:

"Hence , we can clearly distinguish between
these two categories of thought [as mentioned above], but the modernist
category - lying sonewhere in the middle - is relatively misunderstood.
There are actually two sub-categories of what may be termed 'modernist':
(a) one conceives the state in terms of s secular-Islam synthesis,
taking some values from traditional Islam and reconciling them with
modern ideas on law, economics and the state (b) the other rejects
not only theocracy and secular materialism, but 'synthesis' as well,
since this idea is ultimately incompatible with the Islamic worldviews
as derived from the principle of Tauheed [Unity of God].
This group treats secular-Islam as a hybrid between conflicting
ideas and seeks an 'Islamic state' which is neither religious, nor
materialist, nor secular-Muslim. Jinnah best fits the latter of
these [two] sub- categories."

Saleena Karim points out that though Mr. Jinnah might
not have described the State of Pakistan as an Islamic State in
his Presidential address in the Constituent Assembly of Paistan
delivered on 11 August 1947, in other speeches Mr. Jinnah has described
Pakistan as as Islamic State. This is a very important point which
she discusses throughout her book and therfore it needs more clarification
and some subtle philosophical discussion.

Before the creation of Pakistan and after its creation,
Jinnah talked about the state of Pakistan to be based on the universal
principles of Islam. Generally Jinnah preferred the use of the words
'principles of Islam' rather than the word 'Islam' only which is
significant. As for example in the year 1943, Mr. Jinnah delivering
his lecture at Ismail Yusuf College, Bombay, said the following:

In Pakistan , we shall have a
state which will be run according to the principles of Islam. It
will have its cultural, political and economical structure based
on the principles of Islam. The non- Muslims need not fear because
of this, for fullest justice will be done to them, [and] they will
have their full cultural, religious, political and
economic rights safeguarded. As a matter of fact, they will be more
safeguarded than in the present-day so callled democratic parliamentary
form of Government."

He emphasized principles of Islam rather than Islam
(as traditionally understood). Here it seems that Mr. Jinnah makes
a distinction between Islam and the Muslim community. By Islam,
he means the principles of Islam which are universal and are to
be applied to Muslims as well as non-Muslims equally, and as citizens
they all will have equal rights. In the present times, most Muslims
are Muslims because they are born in Muslim families and non -Muslims
are also born non-Muslims , because they are born in respective
non- Muslim families. But the principles of Islam are universal
and these principles are freedom, equality, justice, brotherhod
and fairplay which are to be followed in individual lives and also
imbibed in the social, economic, and political structure of the
society in all countries. Specially Muslim-majority countries are
expected to follow these principles in a non-discriminating way
seriously and sincerely as it is enjoined in Quran.

Dr. Mohammed Iqbal, in his epoch-making book Reconstruction
of Religius Thought in Islam clarified the true approach of
Islam towards these burning questions in the following words:

"In Islam, the spiritual
and the temporal are not two distinct domains, and the nature of
an act, however, secular in its import, is determined by the attitude
of mind with which the agent does it. It is the invisible mental
background of the act which ultimately determines its character.

"Islam is a single unanalysable reality which
is one or the other as your point of view varies. Suffice it to
say that this ancient mistake arose out of the bifurcation of the
unity of man into two distinct and separate realities whcih somehow
have a contact, but which are in essence opposed to each other [according
to them] *

"The truth, however, is that matter is spirit
in space time reference [i.e. spirit looks to be matter in space-time
reference]. The unity called man is body when you look at it as
acting in regard to what we call the external world, it is mind
or soul when you look at it as acting.

The essence of 'Tauhid [Unity of God in the sense
of the whole universe as existing in God and God's creation being
the self of God's expresion in the form of sub-egoes in their increasing
degrees of egohood and culmination in the connscious egohood of
Man] as a working idea is equality, solidarity and freedom. The
State, from the Islamic standpoint, is an endeavour to transform
these ideal principles into space-time forces, an aspiration to
realize them in a difinite human organization. It is in this sense
alone that the State in Islam is [may be] called a theocracy, not
in the sense that it is headed by a representaititive of God on
earth who can always screen his despotic will behind his supposed
infallibility. The critics of Islam have lost sight of this important
cnsideration. The ultimate Reality according to the Quran, is spiritual
and its life consists in its temporal activity. The spirit finds
its opportunities in the natural, the material, the secular. All
that is secular is therefore sacred in the roots of its being. The
greatest service the modern science has rendered to Islam, and as
a matter of fact, to all religions consists in its criticism of
what we call material or natural - a criticism which discloses that
the merely material has no substance until we discover it rooted
in th spiritual. There is no such thing as a profane world. All
this immensity of matter constitutes a scope for the self-realization
of Spirit - All is holy ground. As the Prophet so beautiflly puts
it : " The whole of this earth is a mosque " . The State,
according to Islam is only an effort to realize the spiritual in
a human organization. But in this sense, all State, not based on
mere domination and ( actually ) aiming at the realization of ideal
principles, is theocratic" (pp 154, 155).

[* The words in [brackets] written in this
quotaton from Iqbal's book, have been introduced by the writer of
this review article.]

Mr. Jinnah had similar views as Dr. Iqbal had regarding
the relationship between religion on the one hand and one's social,
political and economic activities on the other. Iqbal combined science,
metaphysics and religion in expressing his view point while Jinnah
expressed the same view point, but in a simple philosophical form.
As for example, Mr. Jinnah in his letter to Gandhiji on 21st January,
1940, wrote to him as follows:

"Today you deny that religion can be a main
factor in determining a nation, but you yourself, when asked wht
your moti8v e in life was, "the thing that leads us to do what
we do", whether it was religious, social or political, said
: "Purely religious". This was the question asked of me
by the late Mr. Montagu [Secretary of State of India on behalf of
the Government of U.K.] when I accompanied a deputation which was
purely political. "How you, social reformer", he exclaimed,
"have found your way into this crowd?" My reply was that
it was only an extension of my social activity. I could not be leading
a religious life unless I took part in polictics. The gamut of man's
activities today constututes an indivisible whole. You cannot divide
social, economic, political and purely religious work into watertight
compartments. I do not know any religion apart from human activity.
It provides a moral basis to all other activities which they would
otherwise lack, reducing life to a maze of "sound and fury
signifying nothing"."

These views of Mr. Jinnah though expressed in the year
1940 in his letter to Gandhiji, but must be the part of his world
view even before 1918, as theMontagu-Chemsford Report on Indian
Constituational Reforms appeared in 1918 and Jinnah might have probably
seen Montagu to discuss the Indian Constituational Reforms as a
member of
Indian delegation even before 1918 or in 1918.

This shows that Jinnah and Iqbal had similar world
views and both emphasized the spirit and the universal principles
of Islam like freedom, justice, fairpay, equality and brotherhood.
They came to these views independently of each other and then cooperated
with each other in the realization of these values in individual
life and social practice.

What Jinnah meant by Islam, and hence princlples
of Islam becomes clearer by taking into account his two more speeches
- one before thecreation of Pakistan and the other one after its
creation. Mr. Jinnah in his Presidential address of the All India
Muslim League Sesssion in April 1943, said:

"Here I should like to give a warning to the
landlords and capitalists who have flourished at our expense by
a system which is so vicious which is wicked and which makes them
so selfish that it is difficult to reason with them. The exploitation
of the masses has gone into their blood. They have forgotten the
lesson of Islam. Greed and selfishness have made these people subordinate
to the interests of others in order to fatten themselves. It is
true that we are not in power today. You go any where to the country
side. I have visited some villages. There are millions and millions
of our people who hardly get one meal a day. Is this civilization?
Is this the aim of Pakistan ? Do you visualize that millions have
been exploited and cannot get one meal a day! If that is the idea
of Pakistan, I would not have it. If they [landlords and capitalists]
are wise, they will have to adjust themselves to the new modern
conditions of life. If they do not, God help them, we shall not
help them. Therefore, let us have faith in ourselves. Let us not
falter or hesitate. That is our goal. We are going to achieve it.
The constitution of Pakistan can only be framed by the Millat and
the people."

Jinnah died on 11th September, 1948. But even on First
July, 1948. i.e. only two months before his demise, Jinnah, despite
his fast deteriorating health, he decided to attend the opening
ceremony of the State Bank of Pakistan (central bank of the country),
Karachi and on this occasion of declaration of economic sovereignty,
he declared:

"I shall watch with keenness the work of your
Research Organization in evolving banking practices compatible with
Islamic ideals of social and economic life. The economic sysem of
the West has created almost insoluble problems for humanity and
to many of us, it appears that only a miracle can save it from [the]
disaster that is now facing the world. It has failed to do justice
between man and man and to eradicate friction from the international
field. On the contrary, it was largely responsible for the two world
wars in the last half century. The Western world, inspite of its
advantages of mechanization and industrial efficiency, is today
in a worse mess than ever before in history. The adoption of Western
economic theory and practice will not help us in achieving our goal
of creating a happy and contented people. We must work out our destiny
in our own way and present to the world economic system based on
[the] true Islamic concept of equality of manhood and social justice.
We will thereby be fulfilling our mission as Muslims and giving
to humanity the message of peace, which alone can save it and secure
the welfare, happiness and prosperity of mankind."

I think this is enough to clarify the meaning of the
principles of Islam as Jinnah understood them. Hence, let us now
come to the understanding of the Objectives Resolution that the
Prime Minister of Pakistan Mr. Liaquat Ali Khan submitted in the
Constituent Assembly of Pakistan which passed it on 12th March,
1949. The constitution was to be based on this Resolution. So, it
may be considered as the Preamble of the Constitution.

The Objectives Resolution begins to read in the name
of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. This is an excellent and
very proper beginning.

In this Resolution, there is the mentioning of the
sovereignty of God and the representatives of the people are expected
to exercise this authority of behalf of God within limits prescribed
by him as a sacred trust. It is also mentiond that Muslims will
be following individually and collectivelty the teachings of Islam
as enunciated in the Holy Quran and Sunnah. These are very noble
sentiments. Now the sacred trust of God is given in Quran and illustrated
through Sunnah of the Prophet. Thus, they will apply to all the
people of Pakistan irrespective of their religion or creed . But
Shias and Sunnis quote conflicting Ahadis and Sunnah, and among
Shias and Sunnis there are their own respective different schools
of thought which quote mutually conflicting Ahadis and interpret
the verse and words of Quran in not only different but actually
in conflicting ways. Also some of the Ulemas who have got the degree
of Alim and that of Mufti would argue that Islam is their subject
only and people who have not got these degrees of Madarasahs (Madaris
) have no right to talk about Islam. Also, their conflicting judgements
are to be acceptable as final, as if from God. Thus, some of the
Ulema would not allow the principles of freedom, democracy, equality,
tolerance and social justice (which are the principles of Islam)
to operate in practice.

So, the question arises whether the gist of Mr. Jinnah's
Presidential speech delivered on 11 August 1947 in the Constitution
Assembly of Pakistan is to be taken as Preamable for the Constitution
of Pakistan or the Objective Resolution as submitted by Mr. Liaquat
Ali Khan is to be taken as the Preamable of the Constitution of
Pakistan.

In Jinnah's speech in the Constitution Assembly of
Pakistan, there is no mention of God, Quran or Sunnah though Jinnah
firmly believed in them all (just as we as Muslims believe in them
all), as it is evident from his other speeches. But he, perhaps,
deliberately avoided to mention the in his speech in the Constitution
Assembly, because he was perhaps afraid that if he did so, then
Ulema would take over everything and there being different firmly
held opinions of different sects of Islam, some of their Uema would
create a sort of mini civil war among different factions of Islam
and the State of pakistan would land in crisis. Elected representatives
of the people of the Constitutent Assembly and then the Parliament
would be pushed and brushed aside and self-appointed Ulema would
take over hold in all walks of life leading to violent sectariaism,
and the worst type of overall totalitarianism in societ . Democracy,
freedom of thought, tolerance, socialism, rule of law, justice,
equality, brotherhood and fairplay which are the universal principles
of Islam as broadly prescribed in the Quran and practised by the
Prophet and highly cherished by Mr. M A Jinnah and Dr. Mohammd Iqbal
would gravely suffer a big eclipse.

The potential roots for providing the scope and opportunity
for the Blasphemy Law introduced during the rule of Zia-ul-Haqq
and also for Shia-Sunni conflicts and other sectarian conflicts
are lying in the Objective Resolution that late Mr. Liaquat Ali
Khan (the Prime Minister of Pakistan) introduced in the Constitution
of Pakistan as the basic constitutional structure (i.e. as the Preamable
of Constitution) for the State of Pakistan. It has undermined freedom
of thought as prescribed in Quran and practised by the Prophet and
as highly cherished by Jinnah and Iqbal. The consequences have been
grave and highly dangereous and so it also bears a lesson for the
Muslim political parties and other parties working in Arab Spring
countries while we all welcome and support very much the Spring
for the establishment of democracy and equal fundamental rights
for all human beings.

Now, in the 3rd category which is that of the modernist
(liberal Muslims), Saleena Karim has divided it into two parts :
(a) believers in secular-Islam synthesis and (b) the other group:

"treats secular Islam as a hybrid between conflicting
ideas and seeks an "Islamic state" which is neither religious
nor materialist, nor secular-Muslim. Jinnah best fits the latter
of these [two] categories."

The very fact that Saleena Karim formulates the phrase
"Islamic state" in inverted commas shows that though the
word "Islamic" before the word "state" may be
used in speeches lectures, and in articles and books, but if it
is not mentioned in the Constitution or in its Preamble, on account
of the fear that the mentioning of it may lead to sectarian conflicts
among Muslims, it should not create any misunderstanding. This is
because putting into practice the principles of freedom, justice,
equality, fairplay and brotherhood (which are the basic universal
principles of Islam which indicate the spirit of Islam) is more
important than mentioning the word "Islamic" and then
forgetting its universal import in practice.